Beat Speeding Ticket With GPS...?

[+TexasGringo]

Saw this article....

 

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080...f-the-hook.html

[+wesleykey]

You can demand a jury trial for any offense, even a ticket. You could SAY wht you want, but they guy might have been going 62 when he got clocked by the cop, then hit the brakes before the GPS took its "twice per minute" reading. If the police radar had been properly certified as required then I (if I were a juror) would have to side with the radar.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

While both do use GPS technology, keep in mind that the transceiver tracking system installed in the boy's car is a far cry from the hand-held receiver that we hunt caches with.

Edited July 21, 2008 by TheAlabamaRambler

[+KG1960]

the GPS took its "twice per minute" reading.

Not quite right - the article said it sends readings twice a minute, not takes a reading. Most likely the GPS takes a reading every second or so (?) but only transmits them to the boy's parents every 30 seconds.

[+ThePetersTrio]

You can demand a jury trial for any offense, even a ticket. You could SAY wht you want, but they guy might have been going 62 when he got clocked by the cop, then hit the brakes before the GPS took its "twice per minute" reading. If the police radar had been properly certified as required then I (if I were a juror) would have to side with the radar.

 

Agreed. I admit I only skimmed the article but I never read anything that suggested the LEO's radar was malfunctioning or in error.

 

I worked at a traffic court many years ago and the cops told me they had to calibrate those things every day so they could testify to their accuracy when called upon in court. I the 2 years I sat in court listening to the myriad of excuses Joe Public had to offer as to why they couldn't possibly have been speeding, I never once heard any testimony that the radar devices were defective or inaccurate. I'm not saying it isn't possible...just saying it's pretty unlikely if the LEO is doing the calibration as directed by precinct policy.

[+Renegade Knight]

the GPS took its "twice per minute" reading.

Not quite right - the article said it sends readings twice a minute, not takes a reading. Most likely the GPS takes a reading every second or so (?) but only transmits them to the boy's parents every 30 seconds.

 

That's probably a fair statement.

 

As for the OP radar has a lot of assumptions built into it's operation and therefore into any ticket written on it. One assumption is that they were measuring your car at that time instead of the other one in the lane. I'm sure there are reams of materials on all the things that can go wrong with Radar. Radar like GPS is a stupid technology. It measures what it recieves blindly. In a GPS that results in the error we all are used to seeing. In Radar, no doubt it results in false readings when the circumstancs are right.

 

Radar and GPS should generally agree with each other. Just like measuring a distance with an electronic device should generally agree with the same measurment using a mechanical method.

[+Moose Mob]

I would guess that the defending counsel would be questioning several things at this point. Was the radar pointing at that specific car? Was the calibration performed properly? Was this device manufactured by the lowest bid?

 

Normaly I would trust the radar. The GPS technology used sounds like it crosses the line of "guilty beyond reasonable doubt"

[+Renegade Knight]

You can demand a jury trial for any offense, even a ticket. You could SAY wht you want, but they guy might have been going 62 when he got clocked by the cop, then hit the brakes before the GPS took its "twice per minute" reading. If the police radar had been properly certified as required then I (if I were a juror) would have to side with the radar.

 

Agreed. I admit I only skimmed the article but I never read anything that suggested the LEO's radar was malfunctioning or in error.

 

I worked at a traffic court many years ago and the cops told me they had to calibrate those things every day so they could testify to their accuracy when called upon in court. I the 2 years I sat in court listening to the myriad of excuses Joe Public had to offer as to why they couldn't possibly have been speeding, I never once heard any testimony that the radar devices were defective or inaccurate. I'm not saying it isn't possible...just saying it's pretty unlikely if the LEO is doing the calibration as directed by precinct policy.

 

You must not have been on duty the day I sent in my testomony that the radar was probably fine but had measured the other car. That officer pulled over two of us at the same time. The other car was in the process of passing me at that time. They sent me a partial refund of my fine. Oregon actually allowed you to make your case via snail mail at the time.

[+scoutingfamily74]

Here in NC the radar is only an instrument used to verify the officers estimate as to the speed of a vehicle. The radar is checked for accuracy in the beginning of each shift and after each and every enforcement action. Also the officer has to track the vehicle using a Doppler tone, which enables the officer to determine what vehicle his radar beam is reflecting off of, pretty simple. Trials involving radars just don't happen, rules of evidence allows the submission of the radar into evidence as long as the prosecutor can establish a foundation as to the proper operation of the instrument. Radar certification is one of the toughest certifications to get and hold so most officers are consistent with the operation in accordance with the standards.

Edited July 21, 2008 by scoutingfamily74

[+ThePetersTrio]

You must not have been on duty the day I sent in my testomony that the radar was probably fine but had measured the other car. That officer pulled over two of us at the same time. The other car was in the process of passing me at that time. They sent me a partial refund of my fine. Oregon actually allowed you to make your case via snail mail at the time.

 

LoL - you'll note that no where in my post did I mention user error.

 

If you only got a partial refund then I take it the conviction remained on your record then? Unless something has changed since I worked at the court, findings of "not guilty" meant no fines or fees.

[+OpenTrackRacer]

That GPS data is worth it's weight in gold for one simple reason... reasonable doubt.

 

It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

[+kifcog]

There have been cases in the UK where the radar guns have been calibrated correctlybut the user has been operating the device incorectly.

 

The laser speed guns should be aimed at the number plate of the car, anywhere else can give wildly inaccurate readings.

 

I remeber reading about a case where a lorry (with a governer set to 52mph) was clocked at doing over 100mph!

 

I think as the previous poster pointed out, reasonable doubt counts for a lot!!

[+scoutingfamily74]

There have been cases in the UK where the radar guns have been calibrated correctlybut the user has been operating the device incorectly.

 

The laser speed guns should be aimed at the number plate of the car, anywhere else can give wildly inaccurate readings.

 

I remeber reading about a case where a lorry (with a governer set to 52mph) was clocked at doing over 100mph!

 

I think as the previous poster pointed out, reasonable doubt counts for a lot!!

 

Several things can lead to those results, you can also read about the 35mph tree in FL if you do some research. All have been explained by the experts in the field and the operators are taught how to recognize and reduce the chances of things like that from happening.